Introduction To Debate

This will be another simple blog. This whole blog will be about debating, and the right and wrong ways to debate.

Why do people debate?

Asking why people debate or why people argue is essentially the same question, only of different context. The greater question is why do we enjoy it?
I believe it's because we enjoy expressing our intelligence. A debate isn't started until someone opposes ideas of personal intelligence.
Once someone starts to express their ideas they have to do so in a way that others will understand. Misinterpretations of another person's ideas usually results in conflict. These conflicts can easily be resolved  with revisions to the original idea. Understanding will only come if the opposition requests elaboration of the original idea.
When the rebuttal is made, it is up to the original idealist to listen thoroughly so better understanding of the audience's confusion is regarded. If the speaker lacks a complete understanding of the questions asked he will be making remarks that pertain to ignorant thoughts.
In retrospect, these same principles apply to the audience.

How can you completely understand the audiences questions?

I assume that is your next question. I apologize if it is not.
Everything we have come to discover and understand started with asking questions. The same goes for anyone who is in a controversy. The best way to understand how to conclude any controversy is to understand the who, what, when, where, how, and why.
After all speculations are outlined it becomes easier for all parties to deduce the next series of questions. New parameters are then defined, leading to more productive responses.

What if everyone understands each other but nobody agrees?

Understanding yet, not agreeing is common, considering everyone thinks within their own uniqueness.

example: A public debate about "the importance of education".

This would appear to be an easy topic everyone should agree on. Yet, if we were to hear each others thoughts on it there is no doubt conflict would arise.
Some of us have a different perspective on just what an "important education" actually entails.

On my own behalf, I believe science is the only education any person needs to succeed in life. Therefore it is the only curriculum that should be taught.

And now, some of you are probably saying, "science is just as important as math, reading, writing, history, and so on". However, some of you are saying, "why do you think science is the most important curriculum"? In the midst of these two responses, there are other arguments to be made. But, for now we will focus primarily on these examples.

The first group has set the parameters of debate based on their personal perception. Whereas,
the second group is aiming to grasp my perspective to refine their previous inclination.

The point of this little scenario is to point out a disagreement. When there is lack of questioning combined with confusion contention will follow. All in all it is still a misunderstanding that needs rectified.

In case anyone wants to know the why of my hypothetical debate, its because "science is a description of facts about the universe and how it works. I believe science is the basis for every curriculum taught in schools and if it isn't then the curriculum is not based on fact."

How do you conclude a conflict?

That depends on your goal. If your goal was to only get people to listen then you can conclude after your point has been made. Anything after your point has been made is the start of a new goal and possibly a completely new conclusion.

If your goal was to reach an agreement, you can't conclude until an agreement to agree or disagree is met. The best way to conclude on an agreement is to allow the other party to process your thoughts and them time to decide  in favor of them or not. If you push to describe something they already understand you will most likely begin to sound arrogant.
If they process your argument and offer a rebuttal, do not counter with the same arguments you have offered before, because if you did your job they are already aware of that. Instead readjust your argument and imply the new understandings that they ask for into your next statement. Let them know all the possibilities that their argument implicates when added to your original ideas.
Do this until an agreement is met, and never under any circumstance feel that your intelligence has nothing to gain from the rebuttals of others arguments or a lack of understanding will occur.

Search Engine Submission - AddMe